Lobsters is a community-driven platform for sharing and discussing links to articles, tutorials, and projects related to technology and programming. Readers can learn about a wide range of topics, from software development and system administration to cybersecurity and artificial intelligence. With user submissions, comments, and voting, Lobsters provides a platform for collaborative learning and knowledge sharing among technology enthusiasts.

Lobsters

Docker is complex and not as simple to use as the alternatives. It is unnecessary for building containers and offers no real advantage. Docker's security features are limited and it has inherent vulnerabilities. The concept of 'application containers' is not new and can be achieved without Docker. There are alternative tools available, such as systemd-nspawn, that provide similar functionality without the complexity.

Docker Considered Harmful

I don’t think this guy like docker that much.

<ul>
<li>What’s in the container?</li>
<li>Pain</li>
</ul>
[from Dune]

I just spilled my coffee, when I read him advocating against Docker, yet naming a systemd component as a better alternative.
With plenty of system engineering experience (+30 years), including in-depth experience with chroot, buildroot, lxc, lxd and other container tech, I too have a few gripes with the popularity of Docker. I’ll give them that they made rather useful cli management tools (credit where it’s due), but otherwise I consider Docker primarily a glorified registry and (commercial) hosting service for Docker images. There’s certainly a bit more to that still, but anyhow.
The idea in the mind of many, that Docker somehow invented/developed/popularized essential container tech itself, has always bugged me. It feels similar to those who assume that GitHub somehow invented/popularized git. Granted, not a completely fair comparison on several counts. However, I think that the commercial interests of both companies have thrown quite some shadow on the underlying tech they build themselves on top of. Even to the point of stifling adoption/use of these technologies on their own or in other applications/products. I don’t believe that’s a good thing, nor do I believe it can be legitimized by whatever (supposedly) positive contributions these companies made to the adoption/popularity of their respective underlying technologies. If anything, in both cases it feels closer to commercial parasitical behavior more than anything else (maybe even predatory).
Having said all that, this guy does bring up some valid points/details, albeit likely a bit more opinionated than purely objective. I’m in now way pretending to be (even remotely) objective myself. To be clear, I consider myself very much opinionated on this topic (too).
Anyways, just my 2 cents on the matter :)

People use docker for the convenience not because of security. You shouldnt be relying on the container itself to be secure, you should have other proper security measures in place on your infrastructure…

That’s a shame. I run almost everything on Docker.